The Role of Participation or Participatory Decision-Making in Managing Change - Literature review Example

The role of participation or participatory decision making in managing change Introduction In Australia two parallel surveys were held on the role of employee participation in the decision-making to bring about organisational change. One, which is known as Australian Workplace Industrial Relations Survey was held in 1995 and another which was conducted 1996 in the Illawarra Region of NSW. The latter study revealed higher participation levels of employees in this region as against overall incidence in whole of Australia. Although no evidence was presented that would prove that lesser participation in organisations resulted in no change taking place. Australian workplaces have seen a paradigm shift post-1990s in the decision-making primarily because there has been greater employee participation. Oragnisations have come to realise that in order to bring about a positive change employee expertise needs to be harnessed. This is seen to bear direct fruit since these employees when offered to participate try to give back the organisation a return in terms of a competitive advantage. This shift is also seen in the light of earlier mechanisms where employees were represented through unions in which individuals employees did not have a meaningful say. Heller et al (1998) have defined participation as “a process which allows employees to exert some influence over their work and the conditions under which they work”. Participation has also been termed as a process in which both superiors and subordinates share influence over what is decided in an organisation to bring about a change. That, however, should not be construed as a fact that managers are deprived of their responsibility for the final decisions taken. When participation is invited from subordinates and their communicative or consultative opinion sought, it can be deduced that their opinions do make a difference to the final decisions that are taken. Overview of issue in health care leadership and advocacy context The concept of participation and change has been felt in the health care and advocacy context as well. This is because in today's global economy, in which health care service providers like hospitals and health centers, are seen as much as parts of corporate conglomerates as centers for healing, the search in continually on to make changes that suit both their clients and these centers. Today health care leadership is under pressure to make correct integration between management knowledge and policies in order to suit the evidence-based practices prevalent in these centers. In other words, it can be said that in this context a research-practice gap that exists needs to be stitched. Health care setups are faced with a dilemma of how to establish a synchrony between policy and managerial innovations and clinical practices without one trespassing the other. It is generally held that socio-historic backdrop should be provided to decision-making processes in health care environments which encompass clinical, managerial and policy issues concurrently. This calls for participation of experts from all three fields (Lapaige, 2009). Assumption of a greater role Markey & Monat (1997) have remarked that participation has assumed a greater role in organisations since 1990s, the decade that saw the emergence of many international pressures on both local and global organisations to stay afloat in the market. In that decade corporate changes that took place in organisations were more trialed to gauge the responses in the marketplace. Further down smaller firms started harbouring bigger dreams by going 'global' but on the way encountered certain uncertain and competitive conditions. The latter warranted a need to improvise on quality of either their products or services, which could not have come by without employee participation. This transformed into the need of having skill force than work force since the former was capable of providing the desired impetus needed to propel the change. The role of participation has also gained wider acceptance because managers too have understood the importance of cooperation, which makes the occurrence of change smoother to adapt and follow. Organisations are no more able to go ahead with loop-sided decisions which look good at the top but unacceptable down the hierarchal ladder. More often than not it is the management that is responsible for initiating participation mechanism. The models followed to press such a mechanism into service vary from nation to nation and are even governed by local laws, rules and regulations. European companies think that employee participation in an organisation is a matter their right. This is one reason why they have work councils, which initiative consultative mechanisms formally. Unitarist philosophies are followed in the United States and United Kingdom. These though encourage managers' prerogatives on organisational change, but the prerogative itself emphasises consultative mechanisms of individualistic types. As a result of this, organisations in these countries prefer being communicative directly with workers than through any representative committees (Poole & Mansfield 1993, Hyman & Mason 1995). It is noteworthy that unions in different countries have reacted to the concept of participation differently. For example those in 'anglo' countries looked at this concept with hostility but the same was not the case in European countries. They looked at the concept of participation with cooperation and encouraged work councils. The mindset, however, is now changing the anglo-type unions too. This is being seen as happening in the wake of economic independence organisational change seems to bring about. Changes are normally done with an expectation of reaping larger corporate benefits and thus providing greater job and financial stability to the participants. On how much is the role of participation in an organisation, Gill (1993) has argued that it is determined primarily by two factors; one is the managerial philosophy and other is the industrial relations environment in which the organisation operates. The orgnisations that have an authoritative way of functioning follow a participation based on the downward communication, which is more of opinion-giving than opinion-taking. In organisations having an open, liberal setup, the participation is generally two-way, which is the most effective way of harnessing the employee potential. Depending on the type of organisation which is looking for a change, the assumption of participation role is determined by several types of mechanisms that may be adopted. Different organisations adopt mechanisms that suit them the most. They weight positive and as well as negative influences the mechanism might exert and thus decide future course of action accordingly. Normally indirect and direct mechanisms are used together keeping in view the economic and political atmosphere of the territory in which organisation operates. In all, participation is considered as a means to end and even though research is yet to zero in on any direct correlation between improved productivity through participation, practical scenarios in organisations are witnesses to the increasing occurrence of participation in organisations. This is because participation provides a package of reforms which a workplace goes through in order to develop full-fledged capacities to compete with similar organisations globally. Participation, it has been seen, works best when organisations are successful in creating trustworthy atmospheres. Much of it is determined by the industrial relations of a country. Participation environment in Australia Industrial relations system in Australia has traditionally resembled like one in the United Kingdom, which changed to some extent in mid 1980s with the introduction of Industrial Democracy and Employee Participation, a policy discussion paper. This paper was a turning point in the sense that it strongly advocated employee participation in the process of decision-making and change management. The document came in the nick of time since around the same time Australia firms, more specifically in the manufacturing sector, were under tremendous pressure due to economic problems. Organisational changes and technological interventions were largely thought of as antidotes to these problems because international pressures were increasing by the day. Around the same time, as remarked by Mitchell (1997) participation in Australian workplaces were thinly scattered, dominated by management and not long-lived in practice. The gradual decline in the unionism, which was highest in Australia from the world viewpoint, led to a somber rise in the role participation was assumed would play in the near future. From 1990 to 1995 the increase in employee participation in Australian workplaces was substantial, as reflected by AWRIS or Australian Workplace Industrial Relations Surveys. The mechanisms involved were quality circles, joint consultative committees, task forces or ad hoc joint committees, employee representative on boards, total quality management, team building, and fully or semi autonomous work groups (Morehead, 1997). Seven to 16 percent increase was observed in employee representation on boards while the representation of ad hoc committees or task forces jumped from 25 percent to 38 percent in workplaces. The increased representation was uniform through almost all industrials sectors. No change, however, was seen in quality circles' participation, which stayed constant at 13 percent. Participation and decision-making Participation is considered as a catalyst that inculcates fortitude, vision, passion, ethical standards, courage, intelligence and tenacity in the participants. It creates a feeling of trust and empowerment which further motivate employees to be committed to the practices, performance and objectives of an organisation. This is one reason why the term employee involvement is frequently used with employee participation interchangeably. The role of empowerment has widely recognised by reports like "Rethinking Construction" report with focus on 'respect for people'. This is despite the fact that empowerment and its meaning do not stand completely defined at the moment (Psoinos and Smithson, 2002; Dainty et al, 2002). It is generally argued that employee participation has imbibed new values in businesses which need to face the changing market practices, competitions and challenges. Both managements and shareholders are now convinced that without employee participation the most desirable results are not possible to attain. It has become the new mantra of organisational competitiveness. The rapidity with which marketplace is changing calls for a matching response with which an organisation's internal characteristics and culture must change. Employee participation is seen a step up on that ladder. Ever since economies have globalised across the world, organisations have been realizing the need for greater flexibility in their work cultures and employee participation seems to be bring about almost half of that flexibility. Flexibility helps relinquishing centralised control and promotes organisational and individualistic performance (Lashhinger et al, 2001; Ozaralli, 2003; Gary, 2006) and it suits contemporary organisations which are faced with intense global competition and driven by external environment characteristics (De Janasz et al, 2002). Flexible, participatory work cultures tend to make employees more innovative, which is advantageous for organisations since the act of participation cuts the bureaucratic hassles and red tape that otherwise comes in the way of smooth functioning of work. The decision-making becomes all the more easier, innovative and free from one-upmanship. The best part of it is that since it gives employees freedom of thought, each new generation comes up with a novel new idea. Historically, it can be said that it is an old idea being adapted in the modern context of business and management. Eastman Kodak is said to have initiated first employee involvement system way back in 1898 through a document which was titled, "Employee Suggestion System". A little over half-a-century later McGregor (1957) rekindled the spark, and around 40 years later Hertzberg (1996) started popularising it through a series of his articles titled, "Work and the Nature of Man", and "The Human Side of Enterprise". Kearney (1997) has remarked that participation inculcates a feeling of ownership in employees and has psychological impacts. He further states that the impact is driven by their ability to be part of problem-solving, decision-making and processing activities. World-class manufacturing, he further states, consider employee participation as one of 7 important elements that can transform large or small companies so greatly to make them highly competitive in the global market. Power of the people working for an organisation is considered as one of its most important factors that determine its failure or success. This power, however, should be in sync with the aims and objectives of the organisation. Apostolou (2002) has remarked that organisation which harness this power perform better than those that don't. A number of studies have taken place, which second this conclusion. These studies are unanimous in their verdict that organisational effectiveness is directly related to its people and their capabilities (Steel and Llyod, 1988; Thompson, 2002; Vanderberg et al, 1999). In countries like the United States organisations work on the philosophical belief that since organisations affect the lives of its people, they have a right to be participants in the decision-making processes. This is because involvement creates in them a greater feeling of stake-holding in the firms in which they work (Bloom, 2000). Collins (1996) has remarked inviting employee participation makes companies socially responsible and using it for decision-making and change-management purposes reflects an organisation's democratic vision (Greenberg, 1986). Conclusion Employee participation has been a subject matter for research and practice for last many years and in the process it has evolved into a stand-alone domain which is assumed to bring greater flexibility in employees and organisations alike. The role of employee participation in the decision-making and change management has begun to be accepted widely across big and small organisations throughout the world since it is believed to bring out greater a competitive edge and efficiency in the firms which use it as a method of making a change through collective decision-making. References Apostolou, A. (January 2002) INNOREGIO: Dissemination of innovation and knowledge management techniques. D. of Production Engineering & Management, Technical University of Crete. Available at http://www.urenio.org/tools/en/employee_involvement.pdf. Accessed on May 14, 2013. Bloom, P J. (2000) Circle of Influence: Implementing Shared Decision Making and Participattive Management. Lake Forest, IL: New Horizons. Dainty, ARJ., et al (2002). Empowerment within the UK construction industry, Leadership and Organisational Development Journal, Vol.23 No.6, pp. 333-42. De Janasz, S. C., Dowd K. O., & Schneider B. Z.(2002). Interpersonal Skills in Organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill. pp. 371-393, 241-259. Gill, Colin, 1993, “The involvement of trade unions in quality: evidence from EC enterprises”, New Technology, Work and Employment, Vol. 8, No. 2, September, pp. 122- 133. Greenberg, E. S. (1986). Workplace Democracy: The Political Effects of Participation, Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Herzberg, F. (1996), Work and the nature of man. Cleveland: World Publishing. Heller, Frank, Pusic, Eugen, Strauss, George and Wilpert Bernhard, 1998, Organizational Participation: Myth and Reality, Oxford University Press, USA. Hyman, Jeff and Mason, Bob, 1995, Managing Employee Involvement and Participation, Sage Publications, London. Kearney, W. (1997): A Proven Receipt for Success: The Seven Elements of World Class Manufacturing. National Productivity Review. Vol.16. No.4. Laschinger, H.K.S., J. Finegan, J. Shamian and P. Wilk. 2002. "A Longitudinal Analysis of the Impact of Structural and Psychological Empowerment on Job Satisfaction of Nurses." Proceedings of the Academy of Management Annual Meeting. Denver, CO. Lapaige. (2009). Evidence-based decision-making within the context of globalization: A “Why–What–How” for leaders and managers of health care organizations. Dovepress Journal. Vol 2, pp. 35 - 46. Markey, Raymond and Monat, Jacques, 1997, ‘Introduction’, in Raymond Markey and Jacques Monat (eds), Innovation and Employee Participation Through Works Councils: International Case Studies, Avebury, Aldershot, U.K., pp. 1-25. McGregor, D. (1960). The Human Side of Enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill. Mitchell, Richard, Naughton, Richard and Sorensen, Rolf, 1997, “The Law and Employee Participation -Evidence from the Federal Enterprise Agreements Process”, The Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 39, No. 2, June, pp. 196-217. Morehead, A., M. Steele, M. Alexander, K. Stephen and L. Duffin (1997), Changes at Work: The 1995 Australian Workplace Industrial Relations Survey, Longman, Melbourne. Ozaralli, N., Effects of transformational leadership on empowerment and team effectiveness, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24(6), 2003. Poole, Michael and Mansfield, Roger, “Patterns of Continuity and Change in Managerial Attitudes and Behavior in Industrial Relations, 1980-1990”, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 31, No. 1, March, pp. 11 - 34. Psoinos, A. and Smithson, S. (2002). Employee empowerment in manufacturing: a study of organisation in the UK, new technology, work and employment, Vol, 4 No.2, pp.5-7. Steel R. P. and Lloyd R. R. (1988). Cognitive, Affective and Behavioural Outcomes of Participation in Quality Circle: Conceptual and Empirical Findings. The Journal of Applied Behavioural Science. Vol 24. Thompson M.A (2002). An Exploratory Investigation of Learning Culture Theory and Employee Participation in Decision Making. Human Resource Development Quarterly. Vol. 13 No.3 Vanderberg R. J., Richardson H.A. and Eastman L.J. (1999). The Impact of High Involvement Work Processes on Organizational Effectiveness: A Second-Order Latent Variable Approach. Group and Organization Management, (24), 3. Yukl, Gary (2006). Leadership in Organizations (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.. Read More